a modest hypothesis

Gartner Magic Quadrants just aren’t

fair. Damn it!

GARTNER DISCLOSURE: MQ CRITERIA• Market Understanding: The ability of a vendor to understand buyers' needs and translate these needs into products and services. A

vendor that shows the highest degree of vision listens and understands buyers' wants and needs, which it can shape or enhance with its vision.

• Marketing Strategy: A clear, differentiated set of messages consistently communicated throughout the organization and publicized through the Web site, advertising, customer programs and

positioning statements.• Sales Strategy: A strategy for selling products that uses the appropriate network of direct and indirect sales, marketing, service and communication affiliates to extend the scope and

depth of a vendor's market reach, skills, expertise, technologies,

services and customer base.• Offering (Product) Strategy: A vendor's approach to product development and delivery that emphasizes differentiation, functions, methodology and feature set in relation to current and

future requirements.

• Business Model: The validity and logic of a vendor's underlying business proposition.

• Vertical/Industry Strategy: A vendor's strategy to direct resources, skills and offerings to meet the needs of market segments,

including vertical industries.• Innovation: Marshaling of resources, expertise or capital for competitive advantage, investment, consolidation or defense against acquisition.

• Geographic Strategy: A vendor's strategy to direct resources, skills and offerings to meet the needs of regions outside of the vendor's "home" or native area, directly or through partners, channels and subsidiaries, as appropriate for that region and market.

Lots of ideas online

Personally, though I’m not a lawyer or legal expert, I think it’s unlikely that ZL can win its case. In one recent case in which securities rating agencies’ opinions relating to the subprime mortgage crisis were found not to be protected by the First Amendment, there were some different circumstances, such as one judge’s opinion that plaintiffs had sufficiently proven ratings agencies did not sincerely believe their own statements had basis in fact. The lawsuit between ZL and Gartner, on the other hand, seems to come down to the weight given to sales and marketing strength over technical product specifications rather than Gartner’s sincerity.

ZL’s complaint appears to be a little different than the usual pay-to-play complaint. ... The legal paperwork implies that ZL paid (although that is not clear), got to play, and didn’t like the way the game turned out. ZL supposedly got marked down because of poor sales and marketing. ... I would say Gartner got that right.

The central problem with ZL Technologies and their placement in the Gartner Magic Quadrant is that ZL has, after 10 years, been unable to scale their business to match the competition. While the ZL Technologies products may have superior features and capabilities, and the market leaders may have all of the deficiencies cited in ZL’s legal filings, the fact remains ZL Technologies remains an extremely small player in a market dominated by huge technology companies.

hypothesis

Companies positioned as leaders and visionaries in Gartner Magic Quadrants are ranked higher on the marketing and brand mq impact scale.

Validating the Hypothesis

• Methodology– Quantitative-esque and Qualitative

• Content Analysis– Reviewed Gartner MQ Criteria– Reviewed 6 Final Gartner MQ’s – Reviewed previous 11 MQ submissions and thought a little

about the eventual placement or inclusion• 4 Products• 5 MQ Segments

– Reviewed 4 hype cycles for market maturity and requirements coverage

• Analyzed online brand and marketing of 2 samples from email archiving and Integration service providers

The Tools

The Marketing & Brand MQ Impact Scale

Relative scale for determining placement of a organization in a given MQ via online content, social inputs, historical Gartner documents and seemingly magical Hubspot marketing tools.

Marketing Value + Arbitrary Brand Value = MQ Impact Score

Marketing Value

What makes up the marketing value?

• Gobblygook rating

• Website Grade

• Google page rank via website grader

formula(100-Gobblygook)+(google rank *

10)+web site rank = marketing value

Marketing Value

0 100 200 300

CommVault

MetaLogix

zl tech

Quest Software

Mimosa

Symantec

Autonomy

MQ: Email Archiving

Marketing Value

Leaders

Visionaries

Chllgr

niche

Arbitrary Brand Inputs

• General online brand image– Social presence, blog and delicious links

• Web site usability

• Messaging and positioning

• Four participants in the arbitrary sample – varied levels of participation:– @emmyeg: Female, Age 31, Luddite-ish

– Hadrian: Male, Age 2, Digs cool colors

– Prescott: Male, Age 4, More flash is always better

– @spatially: Male, Age 37, product guy, dad

Formula

Market Value

+

Arbitrary Brand Value

=

MQ Brand Impact Scale

Marketing & Brand MQ Inpact Scale

0 100 200 300 400

CommVault

MetaLogix

zl tech

Quest Software

Mimosa

Symantec

Autonomy

Marketing Value

Arbitrary Brand Value

Leaders

VisionariesChllgr

niche

The Brand and Marketing MQ Impact Scale

Niche Challengers Visionary Leaders

Changing Impact Over Time?

Niche Challengers Visionary Leaders

NicheChallenge

rsVisionary Leaders

…conclusion…

Marketing and brand indeed do influence an organizations placement on a magic quadrant, not because of the math or diagrams, but because Gartner ‘s criteria says it does.